On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 10:58 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> This allows the user to do their own manual polling in more
> complicated setups.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman
> ---
perf_buffer has it, so it's good for consistency. In practice, though,
I'd expect anyone who needs more complicat
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 3:00 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:00:24AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:41 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 01:01:27PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 4:37 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 12/3/20 4:26 AM, Roman Gushchin wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 06:54:46PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >> On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 1:59 PM Roman Gushchin wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 5) Cryptic -EPERM is returned on exceeding the limit. L
On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 4:44 PM Alan Maguire wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 5 Dec 2020, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > __builtin_btf_type_id() is really only supported in llvm12
> > and 64bit return value support is pushed to llvm12 trunk
> > a while back. The builtin is introduced in llvm11 but has a
>
On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 9:04 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 06:19:12PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 3:00 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 04, 2020 at 11:00:24AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:39 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> The error message here is misleading, the argument will be rejected
> unless it is a known constant.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman
> ---
LGTM.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 1:14 AM Gilad Reti wrote:
>
> Add support for pointer to mem register spilling, to allow the verifier
> to track pointer to valid memory addresses. Such pointers are returned
> for example by a successful call of the bpf_ringbuf_reserve helper.
>
> This patch was suggested
On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 11:27 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
>
> On 01/11/21 23:26, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 10:20 AM Qais Yousef wrote:
> > >
> > > Reuse module_attach infrastructure to add a new bare tracepoint to check
> > >
On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:24 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 12:00 PM Nathan Chancellor
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 04:50:50AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 4:34 AM Nathan Chancellor
> > >
On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 3:12 AM Christopher William Snowhill
wrote:
>
> There appears to be a regression with the filesystem NLS modules. I cannot
> load any of them. They all produce:
>
> modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'nls_cp437': Invalid argument
>
> The system journal reports:
>
> Jan 08 02
On Thu, Jan 7, 2021 at 6:08 PM 彭浩(Richard) wrote:
>
> struct bpf_object *obj is not used in bpf_object__probe_loading, so we
> can remove it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Hao
> ---
It causes no harm, no performance cost, and no maintenance issues. I
consider eventually allowing to have a per-bpf_obje
On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 7:37 AM Alan Maguire wrote:
>
> On Mon, 11 Jan 2021, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 9:34 AM Alan Maguire
> > wrote:
> > > Currently the only "show" function for userspace is to write the
> > >
On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 7:49 AM Naresh Kamboju
wrote:
>
> Perf build failed on stable-rc 5.4 branch due to this patch.
>
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 19:15, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> >
> > From: Andrii Nakryiko
> >
> > [ Upstream commit d8123624506cd627
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 8:28 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 07:38:42PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >
> > See above. I don't know which hassle is libbpf for users today. You
> > were implying code size used for functionality users mi
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 1:11 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 10:12:40AM IST, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > Is there some succinct but complete enough documentation/tutorial/etc
> > that I can reasonably read to understand kernel APIs provided by TC
&
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:11 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> The current way to provide a no-op flag to 'bpf_ringbuf_submit()',
> 'bpf_ringbuf_discard()' and 'bpf_ringbuf_output()' is to provide a '0'
> value.
>
> A '0' value might notify the consumer if it already caught up in processing,
> so let's
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:12 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> The current code only checks flags in 'bpf_ringbuf_output()'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 8
> kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c | 13 +++--
> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 8
On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:16 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:54 PM Pedro Tammela wrote:
> >
> > BPF_CALL_2(bpf_ringbuf_submit, void *, sample, u64, flags)
> > {
> > + if (unlikely(flags & ~(BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP | BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP)))
> > + return -EI
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 9:28 AM Song Liu wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 28, 2021, at 9:10 AM, Pedro Tammela wrote:
> >
> > 'bpf_ring_buffer__poll()' abstracts the polling method, so abstract the
> > constants that make the implementation don't wait or wait indefinetly
> > for data.
> >
> > Signed-off-by
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:11 AM Jisheng Zhang
wrote:
>
> From: Jisheng Zhang
>
> This is useful for cross compile process to point linker to the
> correct libelf, libcap, libz path.
Is this enough to make cross-compilation of selftests/bpf work? I
think there was a discussion another day about
On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:37 AM Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
> This series implements extended BPF on powerpc32. For the implementation
> details, see the patch before the last.
>
> The following operations are not implemented:
>
> case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X: /* dst /= src */
>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This type provides the guarantee that an argument is going to be a const
> pointer to somewhere in a read-only map value. It also checks that this
> pointer is followed by a NULL character before the end of the map value.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> The implementation takes inspiration from the existing bpf_trace_printk
> helper but there are a few differences:
>
> To allow for a large number of format-specifiers, parameters are
> provided in an array, like in bpf_seq_printf.
>
> Becau
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> When initializing the __param array with a one liner, if all args are
> const, the initial array value will be placed in the rodata section but
> because libbpf does not support relocation in the rodata section, any
> pointer in this array
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Similarly to BPF_SEQ_PRINTF, this macro turns variadic arguments into an
> array of u64, making it more natural to call the bpf_snprintf helper.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h | 15 +++
>
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 9:36 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
> >
> > When initializing the __param array with a one liner, if all args are
> > const, the initial array value will be placed in the rodata section but
>
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This exercices most of the format specifiers when things go well.
typo: exercises
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/snprintf.c | 71 +++
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_snprintf.
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 5:45 AM Masanari Iida wrote:
>
> This patch fixes a spelling typo in do_hbm_test.sh
>
> Signed-off-by: Masanari Iida
> ---
Thanks, applied to bpf-next. For the future patches, please use [PATCH
bpf-next] subject prefix if you are sending patches against bpf-next
tree (of
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:01 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 3/14/21 6:38 PM, Pedro Tammela wrote:
> > Linux headers might pull 'linux/stddef.h' which defines
> > '__always_inline' as the following:
> >
> > #ifndef __always_inline
> > #define __always_inline __inline__
> > #endif
> >
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:43 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 5:36 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > +#define ___bpf_build_param0(narg, x)
> > > +#define ___bpf_build_param
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:58 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:03 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 2:02 PM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > + } else if (arg_type == ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR) {
> > > + s
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 5:46 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:35 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:58 PM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 2:03 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> > > wrote:
> > > > O
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 8:02 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> The current code bails out with negative and positive returns.
> If the callback returns a positive return code, 'ring_buffer__consume()'
> and 'ring_buffer__poll()' will return a spurious number of records
> consumed, but mostly important w
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 8:22 AM Lorenz Bauer wrote:
>
> Invoking BPF_OBJ_GET on a pinned bpf_link checks the path access
> permissions based on file_flags, but the returned fd ignores flags.
> This means that any user can acquire a "read-write" fd for a pinned
> link with mode 0664 by invoking BPF
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 7:42 AM Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 22/03/2021 à 18:53, Andrii Nakryiko a écrit :
> > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 9:37 AM Christophe Leroy
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> This series implements extended BPF on powerpc32. For the impleme
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Two helpers (trace_printk and seq_printf) have very similar
> implementations of format string parsing and a third one is coming
> (snprintf). To avoid code duplication and make the code easier to
> maintain, this moves the operations assoc
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This type provides the guarantee that an argument is going to be a const
> pointer to somewhere in a read-only map value. It also checks that this
> pointer is followed by a zero character before the end of the map value.
>
> Signed-off-by:
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 2:53 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
> >
> > Two helpers (trace_printk and seq_printf) have very similar
> > implementations of format string parsing and a third one is coming
> > (snprin
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> The implementation takes inspiration from the existing bpf_trace_printk
> helper but there are a few differences:
>
> To allow for a large number of format-specifiers, parameters are
> provided in an array, like in bpf_seq_printf.
>
> Becau
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> When initializing the __param array with a one liner, if all args are
> const, the initial array value will be placed in the rodata section but
> because libbpf does not support relocation in the rodata section, any
> pointer in this array
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Similarly to BPF_SEQ_PRINTF, this macro turns variadic arguments into an
> array of u64, making it more natural to call the bpf_snprintf helper.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h | 18 ++
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 7:23 PM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This exercises most of the format specifiers when things go well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
Looks good. Please add a no-argument test case as well.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> .../selftests/bpf/pro
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 5:01 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> Update the header file so we can use the new defines in subsequent
> patches.
>
> Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> ---
> tools/include/uapi/linux/pkt_cls.h | 174
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 5:01 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> This change introduces a few helpers to wrap open coded attribute
> preparation in netlink.c.
>
> Every nested attribute's closure must happen using the helper
> end_nlattr_nested, which sets its length properly. NLA_F_NESTED is
>
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:54 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 04:55:51AM IST, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 5:01 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Update the header file so we can use the new
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 7:15 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 05:30:03PM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > This adds some basic tests for the low level bpf_tc_* API and its
> > bpf_program__attach_tc_* wrapper on top.
>
> *_block() apis from patch 3 and 4 are not co
On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 5:02 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> This adds functions that wrap the netlink API used for adding,
> manipulating, and removing filters and actions. These functions operate
> directly on the loaded prog's fd, and return a handle to the filter and
> action using an ou
On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 6:40 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 09:32:58PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > I think it's better to start with new library for tc/xdp and have
> > > libbpf as a dependency on that new lib.
> > > For ex
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 8:57 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, A
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 3:10 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 4/15/21 1:58 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:32 PM Daniel Borkmann
> > wrote:
> >> On 4/15/21 1:19 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:33 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 2:38 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > +static int try_get_fmt_tmp_buf(char **tmp_buf)
> > > +{
> >
ormat string length
> arg.
>
> Because the format-string is known at verification time, we also do
> a first pass of format string validation in the verifier logic. This
> makes debugging easier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
LGTM.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> The "positive" part tests all format specifiers when things go well.
>
> The "negative" part makes sure that incorrect format strings fail at
> load time.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/snprintf.c
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 12:25 PM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> In 'bpf_ringbuf_reserve()' we require the flag to '0' at the moment.
>
> For 'bpf_ringbuf_{discard,submit,output}' a flag of '0' might send a
> notification to the process if needed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela
> ---
Great, thanks! A
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 9:38 AM Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> On 4/11/21 8:48 PM, a...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
> > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2021-04-11-20-47 has been uploaded to
> >
> >https://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/
> >
> > mmotm-readme.txt says
> >
> > README for mm-of-the-moment:
> >
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Two helpers (trace_printk and seq_printf) have very similar
> implementations of format string parsing and a third one is coming
> (snprintf). To avoid code duplication and make the code easier to
> maintain, this moves the operations assoc
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
LGTM.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> include/linux/bpf.h | 1 +
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 41 +
> 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+)
>
[...]
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> The implementation takes inspiration from the existing bpf_trace_printk
> helper but there are a few differences:
>
> To allow for a large number of format-specifiers, parameters are
> provided in an array, like in bpf_seq_printf.
>
> Becau
r in this array will stay NULL.
>
> Fixes: c09add2fbc5a ("tools/libbpf: Add bpf_iter support")
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
Looks good!
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h | 40 +++--
> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
[...]
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Similarly to BPF_SEQ_PRINTF, this macro turns variadic arguments into an
> array of u64, making it more natural to call the bpf_snprintf helper.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
Nice!
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This exercises most of the format specifiers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
> ---
As I mentioned on another patch, we probably need negative tests even
more than positive ones.
I thin
On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:06 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:47 AM Alexei Starovoitov
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:38:06AM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> >>
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:21 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:21 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > >
> > > This exercises most of the format specifiers.
> > >
>
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 3:06 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 1
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 2:46 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 1:16 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Revest wrote:
> > > +static int check_bpf_snprintf_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > > +
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:30 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Hey Geert! :)
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 8:02 PM Geert Uytterhoeven
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 9:41 AM Andrii Nakryiko
> > wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 8:38 AM Florent Reves
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue,
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 4:32 PM Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>
> On 4/15/21 1:19 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:51 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> > wrote:
> >> Andrii Nakryiko writes:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 3:58 AM Toke Høiland
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:58 AM Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:56:32PM +0200, Florent Revest wrote:
> > It is just missing a ';'. This macro is not used by any test yet.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> Fixes: 22ba36351631 ("selftests/bpf: Move and extend ASSERT_xx
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 11:54 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> Two helpers (trace_printk and seq_printf) have very similar
> implementations of format string parsing and a third one is coming
> (snprintf). To avoid code duplication and make the code easier to
> maintain, this moves the operations asso
f/prog_tests/snprintf.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_snprintf.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_snprintf_single.c
>
> --
> 2.31.1.368.gbe11c130af-goog
>
Looks great, thank you!
For the series:
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko
On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 5:18 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
wrote:
>
> This adds some basic tests for the low level bpf_tc_cls_* API.
>
> Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_tc_bpf.c| 112 ++
> ..
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:34 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> Em qua., 31 de mar. de 2021 às 03:54, Andrii Nakryiko
> escreveu:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:11 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
> > >
> > > The current way to provide a no-op flag to 'bpf_ringbuf_
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 6:29 AM Pedro Tammela wrote:
>
> Em qua., 31 de mar. de 2021 às 04:02, Andrii Nakryiko
> escreveu:
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:16 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 3:54 PM Pedr
On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 2:53 AM Hengqi Chen wrote:
>
> Add missing ')' for KERNEL_VERSION macro.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hengqi Chen
> ---
The fix looks good, thank you. But your patch didn't make it into
bpf/netdev patchworks instance ([0]) most probably due to too long CC
list. Can you please re-sen
On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:27 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 05:49:29AM IST, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > On 3/31/21 11:44 AM, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 02:55:47AM IST, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > Do we even need the _block variant?
On Sat, Apr 3, 2021 at 10:47 AM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:38:06AM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021 at 12:02:14AM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:27 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> > > wrote:
> > > > [...]
> >
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 2:53 AM Alan Maguire wrote:
>
> On Sat, 14 Nov 2020, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 11/14/20 8:04 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 10:59 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> > > wrote:
> > >
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 2:24 PM Seth Forshee wrote:
>
> Building the BPF selftests with clang 11, I'm getting the following
> error:
>
>CLNG-LLC [test_maps] profiler1.o
> In file included from progs/profiler1.c:6:
> progs/profiler.inc.h:260:17: error: use of unknown builtin
> '__builtin_pres
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 1:41 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 01:01:27PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 8:07 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > >
> > > This is somewhat cargo-culted from the libbpf build. It will be used
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 7:29 AM Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/4/20 1:45 AM, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 11:06:31PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >> On 12/3/20 8:02 AM, Brendan Jackman wrote:
> > [...]
> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/atomics_test
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:20 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 09:26:09AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/17/20 7:31 AM, Florent Revest wrote:
> > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 7:47 AM Yonghong Song wrote:
> > > > On 12/11/20 6:40 AM, Florent Revest wrote:
> > > >
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 1:54 AM Christophe Leroy
wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 17/12/2020 à 07:11, Alexei Starovoitov a écrit :
> > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:07:37AM +, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> Implement Extended Berkeley Packet Filter on Powerpc 32
> >>
> >> Test result with test_bpf module:
> >>
>
On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 12:36 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 10:53:57AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:20 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 09:26:09AM -0800, Yonghong So
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 6:37 AM Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>
> From: Leon Romanovsky
>
> The out-of-tree modules are built without vmlinux target and request
> to recompile that target unconditionally causes to the following
> compilation error.
>
> [root@server kernel]# make
> <..>
> make -f ./script
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 11:32 AM Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 10:01:23AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 6:37 AM Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Leon Romanovsky
> > >
> > > The out-of-t
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 3:20 AM KP Singh wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:35 AM Yonghong Song wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/26/20 8:57 AM, Florent Revest wrote:
> > > This helper exposes the kallsyms_lookup function to eBPF tracing
> > > programs. This can be used to retrieve the name of the s
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:09 AM Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/27/20 3:20 AM, KP Singh wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 8:35 AM Yonghong Song wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/26/20 8:57 AM, Florent Revest wrote:
> >>> This helper exposes the kallsyms_lookup function to eBPF tracing
> >>> pr
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 8:59 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This piggybacks on the existing "ksyms" test because this test also
> relies on a __ksym symbol and requires CONFIG_KALLSYMS.
>
> Signed-off-by: Florent Revest
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config| 1 +
> .../testing/se
On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 9:02 AM Florent Revest wrote:
>
> This builds up on the existing socket cookie test which checks whether
> the bpf_get_socket_cookie helpers provide the same value in
> cgroup/connect6 and sockops programs for a socket created by the
> userspace part of the test.
>
> Adding
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:06 PM 彭浩(Richard) wrote:
>
> Compile times error:
> "Error: failed to load BTF from /mnt/linux/vmlinux: No such file or
> directory".
> This file "/mnt/linux/vmlinux" actually exists, but only because
> CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO_BTF
> is not configured with this error.
>
> Sign
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 7:51 PM Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/30/20 9:22 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 11/28/20 5:40 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 09:53:05PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 11/27/20 9:57 AM, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 6:49 AM Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
>
> This commit adds new bpf_attach_type for BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_REUSEPORT to
> check if the attached eBPF program is capable of migrating sockets.
>
> When the eBPF program is attached, the kernel runs it for socket migration
> only if the expe
On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 10:01 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> This relies on the work done by Yonghong Song in
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D72184
>
> Note the hackery in the Makefile that is necessary to avoid breaking
> tests for people who haven't yet got a version of Clang supporting
> V4. It seem
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 9:53 PM John Fastabend wrote:
>
> Yonghong Song wrote:
> >
> >
>
> [...]
>
> > > Great, this means that all existing valid uses of
> > > __sync_fetch_and_add() will generate BPF_XADD instructions and will
> > > work on old kernels, right?
> >
> > That is correct.
> >
> > >
>
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 8:07 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> This is somewhat cargo-culted from the libbpf build. It will be used
> in a subsequent patch to query for Clang BPF atomics support.
>
> Change-Id: I9318a1702170eb752acced35acbb33f45126c44c
Haven't seen this before. What's this Change-Id b
On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 8:08 AM Brendan Jackman wrote:
>
> Change-Id: Ia15bb76f7152fff2974e38242d7430ce2987a71e
>
See recent discussion on KP's patch set. There needs to be a commit
message, even if it's just a copy/paste of subject line. But see also
my other reply, I'm not sure it's worth it to
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 1:43 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote:
>
> From: Sultan Alsawaf
>
> We should be using the program fd here, not the perf event fd.
Why? Can you elaborate on what issue you ran into with the current code?
>
> Fixes: 63f2f5ee856ba ("libbpf: add ability to attach/detach BPF program
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:22 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 05:31:14PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 1:43 PM Sultan Alsawaf
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Sultan Alsawaf
> > >
> > > We shou
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:43 PM Sultan Alsawaf wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 06:33:01PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:22 PM Sultan Alsawaf
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 05:31:14PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrot
301 - 400 of 748 matches
Mail list logo
